Interview with Javid Huseynov, Ph.D., General Director, Azerbaijani-American Council (AAC).
Q: How would you comment on the long-awaited appointment of Matthew Bryza as the U.S. Ambassador to Azerbaijan?
A: In one of my previous interviews in November (http://www.vesti.az/news.php?id=58980), I indicated that a U.S. Ambassador would appear in Azerbaijan by the beginning of 2011. President Obama's recess appointment of Matthew Bryza is a natural consequence of past November elections in the U.S. which served as a reality check for the Democratic Party. The conflict over Bryza's appointment was a very minuscule issue on a much broader election-aftermath scale topped by Obama's deal with Republicans to extend all Bush-era tax cuts, causing severe criticism from his own party.
Nevertheless, by using the recess appointment mechanism, outflanking the blocks by Senators Boxer and Menendez, Administration sent a repeated strong message that a limited ethnic agenda can only temporally impact an election rhetoric but cannot sustainably influence the U.S. foreign policy. A first message of this kind was sent last Wednesday, when, despite the desperate pressure by ethnic interest groups, the outgoing House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, was unable to bring the 'genocide' resolution 252 for a full House vote at the last "lame-duck" session of Congress.
Q: Could the Armenian lobby somehow block this decision?
A: I do not believe that Armenian interest groups have the capability now to prevent Mr. Bryza from serving his duty in Azerbaijan. According to the U.S. Constitution, a recess appointment can be made by the President while the Senate is in recess. Such appointment still needs to be approved in the Senate by the end of next session of Congress which, in this case, means by the end of 2011. And I strongly doubt that the Senate would be recalling Ambassador Bryza back from Azerbaijan in a year from now.
So, instead of continuing to act upon a utopian belief that ethnocentric political agenda is more relevant than a serious economic and foreign policy challenges facing America, the Armenian-American groups should draw conclusions from their failures and seriously rethink their position. Their focus should rather be on issues that create a really negative image for their community today. Among those are the ongoing investigation over the Armenian-led largest fraud in the U.S. health-care history as well as the Wikileaks revelations about Armenia's shipment of weapons to Iran in 2003.
The latter case is particularly grave as the Armenian-shipped armaments ended up being used by Iraqi insurgents to kill identified American servicemen in 2008. Thus, for example, Armenian-American TV celebrity Kim Kardashian could better spend her energy apologizing to the families of U.S. servicemen killed using these weapons instead of intimidating Lakers basketball star Kobe Bryant for his contract to promote Turkish Airlines, or tweeting to push for another controversial ethnic legislature.
It is actually very sad that instead of helping Armenian people to live in peace with their neighbors and to prosper, Armenian-Americans are often misled by phobic and inherently failed agenda from their own community leaders.
Q: Some say that the presence or lack of ambassador is not an indicative factor in case of naturally growing bilateral relations. Nevertheless, the prolonged absence of a U.S. ambassador in Baku had negative impact on U.S.-Azerbaijani relations due to political motives, don't you think?
A: As I emphasized in another interview past summer, the U.S. foreign policy towards Azerbaijan is not formulated in Baku but in Washington. Hence the personality of an ambassador in Baku is largely irrelevant to either the basis or the conduct of such policy, which is formed upon three pillars of interest: energy, regional security and democracy. From the American perspective, any progress in relations is dictated by developments in these three spheres. Any other speculated 'political motives' may be rhetorical but not defining in the bilateral relations.
Q: Can the appointment result in the revitalization of U.S.-Azerbaijani relations and elevate the U.S. role in Karabakh peace process?
A: If we consider that this appointment ends a year-and-a-half-long absence of U.S. ambassador in Azerbaijan, there is now certainly more ground for better prospects in relations. Moreover, Mr. Bryza is a career diplomat closely familiar with the Caucasus region, and specifically with the Karabakh conflict. His appointment in Azerbaijan will help to restore the profile of the U.S. representation in the OSCE Minsk Group, and may even provide some positive impetus in the stalled peace process.
With all that said though any peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan is achievable only through sincere understanding of mutual concerns, avoidance of unrealistic goals and vision of a better future for both nations. External actors may help facilitate but in no way define the terms of such peace, unless, of course, the two sides prefer imposed solutions which would undermine their independence.
W.W.
News.Az
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
